A Serbian diplomat, and friend of Christopher Stevens, says the State Department knowingly sent the gay ambassador to Libya. Arab media says ambassador Stevens was gang raped and then his body was put on display.
Hillary Clinton has been spending US taxpayer dollars to fund homosexual pride events in foreign countries. Her actions have prompted backlashes against the US in Italy, Russia, Pakistan, and other nations. Last year, Barack Obama made it official US policy to fund homosexual rights groups overseas with US tax-dollars.
In Pakistan, the staff of the US embassy in Islamabad was placed in serious danger after being ordered to host a homosexual pride event. Pakistanis rioted outside the embassy and burned American flags.
Friends of Christopher Stevens in Chicago say he was gay. A member of the Serbian diplomatic team based in Chicago told HillBuzz.org that the State Department knowingly sent a gay man to be the ambassador of Libya. HillBuzz.org reports "in Chicagos diplomatic circles at least there is no doubt that Chris Stevens was gay."
The question is, did Hillary Clinton know this? If so, she knowingly sent him into an environment where his presence would be considered a provocation. Hillary Clinton's track record in North Africa is absolutely dismal. The US State Department has successfully turned Libya and Egypt upside down and placed militant Islam in charge of those nations.
Clinton claimed that Libya and Egypt would become western style democracies. She even made the comical assertion that the Muslim Brotherhood was "committed to democracy." Now Clinton's "democracy activists" are murdering Christians in the streets of Egypt, burning American flags, and calling for holy war against Israel. Clinton seems hellbent on bringing the same chaos to Syria as well.
Clinton stated that Stevens killers were well armed and probably connected to Al-Qaeda. She neglects to mention that the Obama administration armed and supported hard-core Jihadists in Libya. Some of whom openly bragged about ties to Al-Qaeda. Hillary Clinton acts like she is surprised that such a reckless policy has blown up in her face.
According to leading Arab media outlets, the murder of US Ambassador Christopher Stevens was even more horrible than what was reported in on the US media. The Arab media reports that Stevens was beaten, gang raped, killed, and then his body was publicly displayed in a manner similar to Gaddafi.
A Libyan doctor who examined the body said Stevens had severe internal injuries and died of "severe asphyxia."
Three other Americans were murdered, including former Navy Seal Glen Doherty.
Christopher Stevens is the first US ambassador to be murder overseas since Adolph Dubs was killed in Afghanistan in 1976.
#1
Intentional? I really doubt it. More likely it's simply a consequence of US Gov't rules against discrimination. It is not possible for Govt agencies, or subcontractors, to discriminate on the basis of gender, age, race or sexual preference. Bottom line is that folks in the State Dept might have known about it, but could do nothing. And so if Stevens requested the assignment and was qualified - he got it.
#3
Sure, but who told the Libyians he was gay? Ya supposed he volunteered his (supposed) orientation?
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/24/2012 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
If he continued gay relationsips while in Libya - then the Liytan guards at his embassy would have known about it. There would have been visitors. That would have been a really bad judment call - if he did that. But who knows? How on earth did the Serbians know about this??
#5
The American left has supported Islam over the Christian faith as evident through politics, leftist blogs, Hollywood, the arts community and many on the right have warned them repeatedly that Islam teaches death to the gay community in the harshest way, but they do not listen.
And now that they have empowered this savage monster even more and have tried to push their values on them, they now seem shocked that the power is being used against them in such a brutal way by their Mohommedan allies.
#6
How on earth did the Serbians know about this? Posted by Raider
We keep dossiers on them. They do likewise. It's not personal, it's just business. Back in the day, homosexual activity was preceived as a lifestyle which could be exploited by a hostile intelligence service (HOIS - a term no longer used). The question of homosexuality was, as I recall, a regular or mandetory question on both the CI and Full Scope polygraph. Intelligence exploitation bsed on sexual orientation, how interesting, how novel a concept.
#8
There has always been rumors about Hillary pitching for the other team. If true, it wouldn't be a surprise if she was receptive to the ambo's request for a Libyan posting. Also diversity has always been a strategy of the Donk party to cobble together various vote blocks. I would also bet the ambassador posting to Egypt has never been well-received by the Egyptians. Gays and women who might have power over the Arabs would, I think, breed resentment. Doubt they are that fond of Hillary either. They are, after-all, the Mideast; it's not San Francisco.
#10
Listening to the big news controversy regarding the late Ambassador's diary. I believe the media, CNN, FOX (all of the media) has missed the point. Bottom line: anything in a destroyed consulate or safe-house is US GOV'T property! Looting of Embassy or Consulate property is still looting, no matter who participates in it.
#11
"Did Clinton send gay Ambo to Libya as an intentional provocation?"
If she did, she's an accessory before the fact to his murder.
Instead of just an accessory after the fact.
In either case, she's a WORTHLESS IDIOT.
Posted by: Barbara ||
09/24/2012 13:12 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Compared to the other state department blunders this is small potatoes. They KNEW it was Sept 11 and Al Queda tries to attack on that day for symbolic reasons. They KNEW Al Queda was up to something at least three or four days before. They did not have Marine security or even a secure compound. If a Republican was in charge we would be talking impeachment and demands for SecState to resign. Instead we violate a filmmakers 1st ammendment rights to placate madmen and distract from the failures.
#13
"I take it from this sad episode that, even though it might be considered a homosexual act, Muslims think it's OK to commit sodomy on infidels."
IF this story about Stevens is true - and I still haven't seen any confirmation (will there ever be one??) ... then the jihadists have done a great job to ensure that no American ever surrenders in the future. From now on ... they're just gonna get a hail of bullets :-)
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/24/2012 6:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
But ... figures don't lie!
But ... liars figure! His 'unskewing' only reveals what most of us already knew.
Posted by: Secret Asian Man ||
09/24/2012 7:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
They aren't 'unskewed'. They're just adjusting their numbers to a different set of weights. Caveat lector...
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/24/2012 8:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
A landslide by R&R would severly "skew" the progressive view of fairness and equality, to say nothing of our Champ's well documented exceptionalism. An R&R victory in November will set social engineers back to Jim Crow. What will teachers and universities have left to teach?
#5
Simple they teach how to catch STDs and be a good dhimmi. Cept my alma mater where teachers had bush stickers and defiantly play Christmas music in the University Center
Posted by: Silentbrick - Halliburton Lost Drill Bit Division ||
09/24/2012 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
of course - they want to depress the Anti-Obama enthusiasm/vote. You'll see ever more drastic partisan skewing until right before the election, when they "unskew" to try and maintain credibility, saying: "hey! We were on the mark right before it counted!"
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/24/2012 9:31 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I an wondering if a lot of skewing is to unlegitimize a republican victory. Allow for clsims of stolen elections, etc. especially if it ends up close.
On Tuesday, Egypt's chief prosecutor issued arrest warrants against eight US citizens. Their purported crimes relate either to their reported involvement in the production of the Internet movie critical of Islam that has received so much attention over the past ten days, or other alleged anti-Islamic activities. One of the US citizens indicted is a woman who converted from Islam to Christianity.
According to the News Agency that Dare Not be Named, Egypt's general prosecution issued a statement announcing that the eight US citizens have been indicted on charges of insulting and publicly attacking Islam, spreading false information, and harming Egyptian national unity.
The statement stipulated that they could face the death penalty if convicted.
The AP write-up of the story quoted Mamdouh Ismail, a Salafist attorney who praised the prosecution's move. He claimed it would deter others from exercising their right to free expression in regards to Islam. As he put it, the prosecutions will "set a deterrent for them and anyone else who may fall into this." That is, they will deter others from saying anything critical about Islam.
This desire to intimidate free people into silence on Islam is clearly the goal the heads of the Moslem Brüderbund seek to achieve through their protests of the anti-Islamic movie. This was the message of Moslem Brüderbund chief Yussuf Qaradawi. Three days after the anti-American assaults began on the anniversary of the Sept. 11 jihadist attacks on America, Qaradawi gave a sermon on Qatar television, translated by MEMRI.
Qaradawi struck a moderate tone. He called on his followers to stop rioting against the US. Rather than attack the US, Qaradawi urged his Moslem audience to insist that the US place prohibitions on the free speech rights of American citizens by outlawing criticism of Islam -- just as the Europeans have done in recent years in the face of Islamic terror and intimidation.
In his words, "We say to the US: You must take a strong stance and try to confront this extremism like the Europeans do. This [anti-Islamic film] is not art. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. This is nothing but curses and insults. Does the freedom to curse and insult constitute freedom of speech?"
Both the actions of the Egyptian prosecution and Qaradawi's sermon prove incontrovertibly that the two policies the US has adopted since Sept. 11, 2001 to contend with Moslem hatred for the US have failed. The neoconservative policy of supporting the democratization of Moslem societies adopted by President Barack Obama Why can't I just eat my waffle?... 's predecessor George W. Bush has failed. And the appeasement policy adopted by Obama has also failed.
Bush's democratization policy claimed that the reason the Moslem world had become a hotbed for anti-Americanism and terror was because the Moslem world was not governed by democratic regimes. Once the peoples of the Moslem world were allowed to be free, and to freely elect their governments, the neoconservatives proclaimed, they would abandon their hatred of America.
As a consequence of this belief, when the anti-regime protests against the authoritarian Mubarak regime began in January 2011, the neoconservatives were outspoken supporters of the overthrow of then president Hosni Mubarak ...The former President-for-Life of Egypt, dumped by popular demand in early 2011... despite the fact that he had been the US's key ally in the Arab world for three decades. They supported the political process that brought the Moslem Brüderbund to power. They supported the process despite the fact that Qaradawi is the most influential holy man in Egypt. They supported it despite the fact that just days after Mubarak was ousted from power, Qaradawi arrived at Tahrir Square and before an audience of two million followers, he called for the invasion of Israel and the conquest of Jerusalem.
In the event, the Egyptian people voted for Qaradawi's Moslem Brüderbund and for the Salafist Party. The distinction between the two parties is that Qaradawi and the Moslem Brüderbund are willing to resort to both violent and non-violent ways to dominate the world in the name of Islam. The Salafists ...Salafists are ostentatiously devout Moslems who figure the ostentation of their piety gives them the right to tell others how to do it and to kill those who don't listen to them... abjure non-violence. So while Qaradawi called for the riots to end in order to convince the Americans to criminalize criticism of Islam, his Salafist counterparts called for the murder of everyone involved in producing the anti-Islamic film.
For instance, Salafist holy man Ahmad Fouad Ashoush issued a fatwa on Islamic websites last weekend calling for American and European Moslems to murder those involved with the movie. His religious ruling was translated by the SITE Intelligence Group on Monday.
Ashoush wrote, "Those bastards who did this film are belligerent disbelievers. I issue a fatwa and call on the Moslem youth in America and Europe to do this duty, which is to kill the director, the producer and the actors and everyone who helped and promoted the film.
"So, hurry, hurry, O Moslem youth in America and Europe, and teach those filthy lowly ones a lesson that all the monkeys and pigs in America and Europe will understand. May Allah guide you and grant you success."
These are the voices of democratic Egypt. The government, which has indicted American citizens on capital charges for exercising their most fundamental right as Americans, is a loyal representative of the sentiments of the Egyptian people who freely elected it. The Salafist preacher is a loyal representative of the segment of the Egyptian people that made the Salafist party the second largest party in the Egyptian parliament. Qaradawi's call for the abolition of freedom of speech in America -- as has happened in Europe -- to ban all criticism of Islam is subscribed to by millions and millions of Moslems worldwide who consider him one of the leading Sunni Moslemholy mans in the world.
Free elections in Egypt have empowered the Egyptian people to use the organs of governance to advance their hatred of America. Their hatred has been empowered, and legitimized, not diminished, as the neoconservatives had hoped.
The behavior of the Egyptian government, Qaradawi and the Salafists also makes clear that Obama's policy of appeasing the Moslem world has failed completely. Whereas Bush believed the source of Moslem hatred was their political oppression at the hands of their regimes, Obama has blamed their rage and hatred on America's supposed misdeeds.
By changing the way America treats the Moslem world, Obama believes he can end their hatred of America. To this end, Obama has reached out to the most anti-American forces and regimes in the region and spurned pro-American regimes and political forces.
When Obama's policies are recognized as driven by appeasement, the seeming inconsistency of his war against Libya's Muammar Qadaffy ...a proud Arab institution for 42 years, now among the dear departed, though not the dearest... on the one hand, and his passivity in the face of the anti-regime uprising in Iran in 2009 and the Syrian uprising against the Assad regime today makes sense. Qadaffy was not a threat to the US, so he was unworthy of protection. The mullahs in Iran and Assad are foes of the US. So they deserve protection. Obama has assiduously courted the Moslem Brüderbund from the outset of his presidency.
The official and unofficial Egyptian exploitation of the Internet film as a means to intimidate and attack the US into disavowing its core principles are proof that Obama's theory of the source of Moslem rage is wrong. They do not hate America because of what the US government does. They hate America because of what America is. And it is because of this that since September 11, the rationale for Obama's foreign policy has disintegrated.
Rather than accept this basic truth and defend the American way of life, Obama has doubled down in the only way now available to him. He, his administration, his campaign and his supporters in the media have responded to the collapse of the foundations of his foreign policy by resorting to the sort of actions they accused George W. Bush, his administration and supporters of taking. They have responded with a campaign of political oppression and nativist bigotry directed against their political opponents.
Late last Friday night, law enforcement officers descended on the home of the Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, the man who made the film that the Moslems of the newly free Arab lands find so offensive. Nakoula was questioned by federal authorities and later released. His arrest was photographed. The image of a dozen officers arresting an unarmed man for making a movie was broadcast worldwide within moments.
Beyond persecuting an independent filmmaker, the White House requested that YouTube block access to it. YouTube -- owned by Google ...contributed $814,540 to the 2008 Obama campaign... -- has so far rejected the White House's request.
The B.O. regime's abetment of bigoted nativism to silence criticism of its substantively indefensible foreign policy was on prominent display last Sunday. Obama's campaign endorsed an anti-Semitic screed published by New York Times ...which still proudly displays Walter Duranty's Pulitzer prize... columnist Maureen Dowd.
In her column, titled, "Neocons slither back," Dowd wrote that Republican Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees Willard Mitt Romney ...former governor of Massachussetts, currently the Publican nominee for president. He is the son of the former governor of Michigan, George Romney, who himself ran for president after saving American Motors from failure, though not permanently. Romney has a record as a successful businessman, heading Bain Capital, and he rescued the 2002 Winter Olympics from the midst of bribery and mismanagement scandals. More to the point, he isn't President B.O... and Paul Ryan ...U.S. Representative for Wisconsin's 1st congressional district, serving since 1999. He is a member of the Republican Party. He proposed an alternative to President B.O.'s 2011 budget and made himself the target of both Democrat and Republican verbal pies... are mere puppets controlled by "neocon puppet master, Dan Senor."
Neocon is a popular code for Jewish. It was so identified by Dowd's Times' colleague David Brooks several years ago.
Dowd said that "the neocons captured" Bush after the September 11 attacks and "Now, amid contagious Arab rage sparked on the 11th anniversary of 9/11, they have captured another would-be Republican president and vice president, both jejeune about the world."
One telling aspect of Dowd's assault on Senor as a neoconservative is that he and his boss in the Bush administration Paul Bremer were the nemeses of the neoconservatives at the Pentagon. The only thing Senor has in common with the likes of Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith is that all three men are Jews.
Moreover, Dowd drew a distinction between supposed "neocons" like Senor, and non-Jewish US leaders Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney who merely "abetted" the neocons.
So Senor doesn't share the same ideological worldview as Feith and Wolfowitz but he's a neocon. And Cheney and Rumseld do share the same worldview as Feith and Wolfowitz. And they are not neocons.
The Times' public editor Andrew Rosenthal dismissed claims that Dowd's column was anti-Semitic arguing it couldn't be since she never said a word about Jews.
The Obama campaign linked to Dowd's column on its Twitter account with the message, "Why Romney and Ryan's foreign policy sounds 'ominously familiar.'"
Obama's campaign's willingness to direct the public to anti-Semitic screeds against his political opponents is consistent with the administration's general strategy for defending policies. That strategy involves responding to criticism not with substantive defense of his policies, but with ad hominem attacks against his critics.
His failed economic policies' critics are attacked as "Wall Street fat cats."
His failed foreign policies' critics are demonized as ominous neocon puppet masters.
There is a difference between appeasing parties who have been harmed by your actions and appeasing parties who wish your destruction. In the 1970s the US appeased the Philippines by transferring illusory sovereignty over the Clark Air Force Base to the Philippine government. America was still America and the US and the Philippines became friends.
To appease a party that hates your way of life, you must change your way of life. The only way America can appease the Moslem world is for America to cease to be America.
#1
To appease a party that hates your way of life, you must change your way of life. The only way America can appease the Moslem world is for America to cease to be America. (and to cease to be a Christian nation)
Like the fall of Rome, the barbarians will take America apart, piece by piece through apeasement of the barbarian's savage demands.
#2
Quote: "Qaradawi urged his Moslem audience to insist that the US place prohibitions on the free speech rights of American citizens by outlawing criticism of Islam -- just as the Europeans have done in recent years in the face of Islamic terror and intimidation.
"
Sorry, you have everything backward...it is America that have a muslim terrorist as President with the whole MSM in the bag for Islam, with even FOX being mostly owned by conservative Islamists(check it out) Opposition to Islam is growing in Europe, with Breivik giving the warning shot across the bow to the Islamist leftist vanguard. Cartoon? Anti islam cartoon in America?...Well these Hollywood movie makers have been arrested, wheren't they?
Fact, the most biting anti-Islam cartoonist can be found in Algier itself!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Dilem
You want a date, brother...No, thanks, I already had a civilian!
#3
They have watched us, they know of our rich bounty and success. They do not fully understand or appreciate it, but surely want it for themselves.
The invaders found the eye of the needle. Diversity, multiculturalism, and the cult of victimization liberally watered by the politics of guilt, have provided them an entry point. They have now begun in ernest the struggle to irradicate our lagging western Protestant culture and way of life.
In the Kübler-Ross model, commonly known as "The Five Stages of Grief", we are now somwhere between depression, and acceptance. A full recover is possible, but I am not optimistic. Our First Amendment and what remains of our entire Biblically based rule of law is now in question. The renaming of streets, schools, and airports cannot be far off.
When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives in New York to address the UN General Assembly, a man who should be in the dock of the accused will instead be given an international podium a cruel parody of law and justice that will put us on the wrong side of history.
Ahmadinejad will enter the US despite being inadmissible under American law. He will address the UN General Assembly despite being in violation of its UN Charter and international law. And he will be indulged by universities, institutes and the media, thereby sanitizing his crimes and mocking the suffering of the Iranian people.
Let there be no mistake about it: A person who pursues the most destructive of weaponry in violation of UN Security Council resolutions, who incites to genocide, who is complicit in crimes against humanity, who is engaged in a massive repression of the human rights of his own citizens, who assaults the basic tenants of the UN Charter such a person should be indicted by this international body; rather than have it provide a pulpit.
Simply put, this charade repeated annually since 2007 ignores and undermines basic principles of domestic, international and humanitarian law.
Indeed, Ahmadinejad belongs on the US watchlist those who aid terrorists... persecute religious minorities... or are prohibited from entering the US.
The evidence of Ahmadinejads criminality on each of these counts is compelling.
In the matter of aiding terrorists, the US State Department has once again named Iran as the leading state sponsor of international terrorism. In particular, Ahmadinejads Iran recruits, trains, finances, instigates and arms its terrorist proxies, such as Hamas and Hezbollah, whose platforms and policies are themselves replete with genocidal calls for the destruction of Israel.
Indeed, Iran and Hezbollah have their footprints not only in the recent attack on Israelis in Bulgaria, but in terrorist attacks spanning five continents in 2012 alone.
Moreover, Iran is complicit in the international criminality of Bashar Assads Syrian regime. This criminal support includes sending military equipment, munitions and surveillance technology involving also Iranian al-Quds special forces all to help sustain the brutality of the Assad regime.
In the matter of religious persecution, one need only recall Irans massive domestic repression, particularly targeting religious minorities, especially the Bahai Irans largest such group whose members are subject to harassment, repression, torture, imprisonment and execution.
Women, students, workers, dissidents, journalists and academics and those who would defend them are also routinely persecuted. Moreover, Iran leads the world in per capita executions and the execution of minors as well as in the imprisonment of journalists and bloggers.
In the matter of incitement to genocide, the evidence here is particularly compelling and disturbing, as Ahmadinejads genocidal incitement is the terrifying and vilifying context for Irans illegal pursuit of nuclear weapons.
Last month alone, Ahmadinejad called to remove the Zionist black stain from the human society, adding that the very existence of Israel is an insult to humankind and an affront to all world nations, and requiring the wiping out of this scarlet letter from the... forehead of humanity.
Indeed, this state-sanctioned culture of hate and incitement to genocide has been persistent, pervasive and pernicious.
The 21st century began with Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calling for the annihilation of the Jewish state. It was followed by the parading in the streets of Tehran of a Shihab-3 missile draped in the emblem Wipe Israel off the map, as the Imam says.
It has continued with the use of epidemiological metaphors referring to Jews as filthy bacteria, and Israel as a cancer that must be removed, reminiscent of the Nazis calling the Jews vermin and the Rwandan Hutus calling the Tutsis cockroaches, the whole as prologue to and justification for a genocide foretold.
Instead of being granted a podium at the UN General Assembly, Ahmadinejad should be the object of a criminal indictment.
Simply put, a person who has already committed the crime of direct and public incitement to genocide in violation of international law punishable whether or not a genocide has occurred who is complicit in crimes against humanity both at home and abroad has no place at the UN. Let alone at its most distinguished podium.
Indeed, how can a UN forum host one who openly and avowedly seeks the destruction of a member state? As UN Secretary-General Ban Kimoon said recently in Tehran, I strongly reject threats by any member state to destroy another or outrageous attempts to deny historical facts, such as the Holocaust yet, Ahmadinejad continues to call for the destruction of Israel while denying the Holocaust.
Despite the clear and compelling evidence of Ahmadinejads inadmissibility to the US under both domestic and international law, he is likely to return to the UN because of the 1947 Headquarters Agreement a UN treaty wherein the US agreed not to impede access of representatives of member states to UN headquarters in New York.
While this agreement is said to trump American domestic law, the fact is that the Vienna Law of Treaties affirms that jus cogens the preemptory norms of international law such as incitement to genocide and crimes against humanity override any treaty. Ahmadinejads crimes are such jus cogens crimes. The Headquarters Agreement should not avail and must not prevail.
Moreover, Article 99 of the UN Charter grants the secretary-general the power to refer issues that threaten the maintenance of international peace and security to the UN Security Council. This can and should be done, as surely there is no greater threat to international peace and security today than Ahmadinejads Iran.
Member states should call on the secretary-general to take proactive measures to ensure the UN does not provide a forum to one who callously and deliberately defies, mocks and violates the principles and decisions of the UN and its respective agencies, its charter, and American law itself.
If the US nonetheless allows him entry, Ahmadinejads travel should be restricted to only those parts of New York under UN authority, the Iranian Mission and the airport. The US government is not obliged to treat him as an innocent tourist; rather, it should isolate and shun him as the war criminal he is.
Even if none of these options is exercised, there are ways to break this cycle of impunity and hold the Iranian leadership accountable for its crimes.
The international community should act in solidarity with the oppressed people of Iran by providing neither shield nor platform for their oppressors.
Countries should fulfill their responsibilities under international law including the Genocide Convention and refer the Iranian leaders criminal incitement to genocide to appropriate UN agencies for investigation and sanction.
It is astonishing that this criminal incitement has yet to be addressed by any UN body, though the UN finds it fit to give Ahmadinejad a podium this week.
Moreover, inter-state complaints against Iran could be initiated at the International Court of Justice, while the Iranian leadership could be made to answer for its crimes at the International Criminal Court.
Similarly, Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders should be placed on a watchlist by concerned countries, preventing their entrance as inadmissible persons.
Finally, enhanced comprehensive, consequential and targeted multilateral sanctions must be adopted and enforced not only for Irans continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, but also for its sponsorship of international terrorism and massive violations of human rights.
History shows that sustained international juridical efforts can bring dictators like Milosevic and Pinochet to justice.
Ahmadinejad must be held to account for his criminality not rewarded for it. Our choice is clear: We can either act or be on the wrong side of history.
Irwin Cotler is a Canadian member of Parliament and is the former minister of justice and attorney-general of Canada. He is a professor of law (Emeritus) at McGill University and has written extensively on Iran and has previously prosecuted for incitement to genocide. He is a former Canadian justice minister and currently a co-chairman of the Inter-Parliamentary Group for Human Rights in Iran.
#1
It is astonishing that this criminal incitement has yet to be addressed by any UN body, though the UN finds it fit to give Ahmadinejad a podium this week.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
When Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives in New York to address the UN General Assembly, a man who should be in the dock of the accused will instead be given an international podium a cruel parody of law and justice that will put us on the wrong side of history.
